Is lazy parenting OK? | Bryan Caplan (2022)

Brian Kaplan's Current Work and Methodology

• He is writing a non-fiction graphic novel titled Build Baby Build: The Science and Ethics of Housing, following the format of his book Open Borders.
• He aims to increase information retention and comprehension by combining visual art with text, despite the process requiring roughly ten times more effort per point than traditional academic writing.
• He envisions a library of graphic novels produced in collaboration with the Cato Institute, contingent on the success of the housing book.
• He argues for the full deregulation of housing markets, asserting that even seemingly reasonable regulations (like heritage listing) inevitably metastasize into crippling rules that restrict supply.

Labor Market Economics and Regulation

• Kaplan posits that labor regulations often fail because they treat workers' treatment as a pure gift, ignoring that such mandates can prevent hiring entirely, effectively leaving the worker without a job.
• He illustrates this with a "Brian Kaplan Protection Act" hypothetical: a law guaranteeing a $1 million/hour wage for himself, which would result in him being unemployed if employers anticipate this cost.
• He emphasizes that unemployment causes profound misery beyond financial loss, citing psychological evidence that jobs provide identity, social contact, and meaning, which are critical for well-being.
• He supports open borders as the single most important labor market deregulation, noting that current laws trap human talent in low-productivity regions, causing immense global economic losses.
• He advocates for direct redistribution (e.g., Earned Income Tax Credit) over labor market interventions like minimum wages, as the former transfers income without distorting employment incentives.
• He argues that low-wage jobs, such as working at McDonald's, often serve as "orderly" sanctuaries for individuals from dysfunctional home environments, contradicting the assumption that such jobs are universally hated.
• He suggests that the "self-interest" of voters regarding labor issues is often actually a reflection of group identity or broader societal concerns rather than pure material self-interest.

Immigration and Cultural Assimilation

• Kaplan rejects the "cultural collapse" argument against immigration, stating that evidence shows high levels of assimilation even during periods of massive population growth (e.g., the U.S. multiplying its population tenfold in a century).
• He notes that language acquisition is not a barrier to assimilation: while first-generation immigrants rarely achieve fluency, the second generation almost always does.
• He highlights "pre-assimilation," arguing that modern immigrants arrive already exposed to Western culture and English via the internet, making them easier to integrate than historical immigrants.
• He argues that the "backlash" fear is flawed, citing data that areas with higher foreign-born populations in the U.S. often have more pro-immigration sentiment, and that backlash narratives often mask low priority on the issue for voters.
• He identifies specific cases of immigration failure, such as Palestinian immigration into Jordan and Lebanon, but notes these involved large, homogeneous populations with specific geopolitical objectives that do not scale to diverse, global immigration.
• He contends that Western culture is a "hardy weed" that tends to spread rather than collapse when exposed, and that immigration represents an opportunity for people to escape repressive home cultures.

Parenting and Genetic Influences

• Kaplan asserts that peer-reviewed twin and adoption studies show parental behavior has negligible effects on adult outcomes like intelligence, happiness, and political views once genetics are accounted for.
• He identifies two main exceptions where parenting does have a significant effect: the quality of the parent-child relationship (how much the child likes the parent) and superficial traits like self-reported political party affiliation and religious denomination.
• He clarifies that while environmental effects are small within first-world families, international adoption studies confirm that moving a child from extreme poverty (e.g., Ethiopia) to a high-income country (e.g., Sweden) has massive, lasting positive effects on health and intelligence.
• He warns parents against the "reduced form" limitation of studies, which cannot detect rare, extreme parenting strategies (e.g., training an Olympic athlete) that fall outside the range of standard family environments.
• He suggests that parents should focus on kindness to maintain a good relationship rather than trying to engineer specific personality traits or career outcomes, which appear to be largely genetically determined.
• He notes that research on attachment theory regarding early bonding is difficult to reconcile with twin data, suggesting that long-term happiness and stability may be more genetically determined than shaped by early parenting styles.

The Self-Interested Voter Hypothesis (SIVH)

• Kaplan rejects the SIVH, arguing that 40 years of research shows no strong correlation between an individual's material self-interest (income, job loss) and their voting patterns.
• He attributes voter behavior to group identity (race, ethnicity, religion, class) rather than material self-interest, noting that people often vote against their material interests to support their group.
• He observes that voters are more swayed by national economic indicators (e.g., national unemployment rates) than their personal economic status.
• He argues that the failure of SIVH implies that public policy debates should focus on framing issues around societal benefits and group identity rather than assuming voters are purely selfish.

Philosophy and Methodology

• Kaplan advocates for "common sense philosophy," starting with premises that seem obvious to almost anyone (e.g., "I feel pain," "I have free will") and avoiding abstract axioms that contradict direct observation.
• He defends the existence of contra-causal free will, arguing that his direct introspective experience of choosing is more certain than the deterministic conclusions of physics textbooks.
• He identifies as a "weak deontologist," believing that certain rights (like not murdering an innocent person to save others) should be upheld unless the benefits of violating them are overwhelmingly large.
• He applies this weak deontology to government regulation, arguing that the threshold for coercive state action should be much higher than a simple cost-benefit test requires.
• He critiques the academic tendency toward "arrogant hedgehog" views, where scholars make definitive claims on complex topics without betting on their predictions or acknowledging uncertainty.

Effective Altruism (EA) and Betting

• Kaplan praises EA student groups for their intellectual curiosity and diversity but critiques the movement's tendency toward "social desirability bias," where members adopt popular left-wing orthodoxy (e.g., on climate change or nuclear power) without rigorous cost-benefit analysis.
• He maintains a perfect betting record of 23 for 23, including a recent win against Eliezer Yudkowsky that the world will not end by January 1, 2030.
• He disputes Yudkowsky's timeline for AI-driven human extinction, arguing that infinite intelligence does not logically necessitate a drive to kill humans and that the timeline is arbitrary.
• He remains skeptical that humanity will view past meat-eaters as "savage barbarians" once synthetic meat becomes available, comparing it to how society still views running over squirrels despite knowing they are alive.
• He identifies "social desirability bias" as a key mechanism explaining why many altruistic efforts are ineffective, noting that people prefer "good-looking" causes over "good" ones.

Policy and Autonomy

• Kaplan argues against paternalistic regulations on vaccines, stating that the restriction on individual autonomy requires evidence of massive benefits to justify, which he feels was lacking during the pandemic.
• He suggests that the primary motivation for vaccine regulations is often bureaucratic fear of liability or loss of trust rather than genuine concern for individual safety.
• He believes that the "self-interest" of voters is often a misinterpretation of group loyalty, leading to policy support that may not align with individual material welfare.